Latest Jon Wilner blog article regarding PAC 12 expansion.He says that if Larry Scott calls for a vote on conference expansion it means that he thinks that he has the votes to approve it.Also,he believes that the PAC 12 will pass on Texas if that school does not agree to equal revenue sharing for the good of the league.Link at http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespo ... er-matters

Quinn and Fresno are absolutely on target. Teams must play every other school in their division, and that means only 2 crossover games for a hypothetical Pac 16. Not much LA exposure there for the Eastern Division. Back to the dreaded zipper model anyone?

Of course, given latest stories from the Coast (president resistance) and Oklahoma (maybe we'll stay), no expansion may occur. I'm beginning to think that's a good thing. The Pac 12, Big 10 and SEC have a pretty good setup now. Let them play it out for a few years.

The Arizona schools are not happy about not playing LA schools. Arizona is more a Pacific coast type state and less like a mountian west state and there is where most of us spend our spare time on the coast in California.

Colorado moved to the Pac 12 to gain access to Califonia requiting as well.

Stanford and California are not happy with taking in Texas Tech and Oklahoma state.

The only votes for expansion may come from the Washington and Oregon schools which would gain regular access to LA schools each year.

The California schools already get to play each other regardless that two each are in seperate divisions.

What happens if the Pac 12 does not have the 9 votes?

What happens if Texas agrees to share the LHN with the Texas A&M.

What happens if the Big Ten, SEC, and Pac 12 remain with 12 schools and there is no consolidation of conferences, can the ACC demand enough money to cover taking in Pitt and Syracuse?

excellent piece as always from jon. Touches on an important point: in passing on Oklahoma (and OSU), it means that the Pac12 value (considered lower than SEC and Big Ten despite new TV contract) will always remain in that subservient spot. Oklahoma was a platinum chip that is now out of the picture (I guess never say never, but unlikely). So the Pac-12, a conference that will need to make move to improve their value (since they have no eastern TV markets) has no options. It would take something drastic like a population boom in a MWC city like ABQ, reboom in Vegas which slowed down this decade, etc....and those programs actually becoming something of value. Pac12 value will rise with the overall value trends in college sports, but in passing on Oklahoma now, they have peaked. Big Ten and SEC will get new contracts to put them way up on the top, Pac-12 and others will be behind. But now, the Pac-12 risks being behind the Big 12 if they can get their s*#$ together and finally find some unity.

Despite Scott's aspirations of spreading Pac 12 telecasts over various time zones, it looks like their games will continue to be concentrated in the late PM time slots. Always something good to watch at the end of the day for an East Coaster.

Sources told Orangebloods.com at least six Pac-12 presidents opposed further expansion, and Larry Scott needed nine of 12 votes to approve any new additions.

I wonder who the other two were. The first four are obvious to me:

#1 - Stanford would oppose adding three schools ranked 102, Tier 3 and Tier 3 to a league with only ONE Tier 3 academic institution.#2 - Colorado would oppose the move because they wanted to be affiliated with the Pac-12 schools, and in the Pac-16, they wouldn't have a very worthwhile affiliation with USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Oregon, Ore State, Washington and WSU if they're in the East with Utah, Arizona, ASU, Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK State**#3 - Arizona would oppose because they'd be in the East with Arizona State, Utah, Colorado, Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK State** and not with USC and UCLA. #4 - Arizona State would oppose because they'd be in the East with Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK State** and not with USC and UCLA.

** - yeah, I know the pod thing. But the pod system means "no championship game." They'd have to play a round-robin. Sure, they could switch pods into different divisions every two years, but it still means you're not playing in Southern California every single year.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum